NEW HERE? LEARN MORE
closeclose
Last visit was: 28 Apr 2024, 14:25 It is currently 28 Apr 2024, 14:25
Decision Tracker
My Rewards
New posts
New comers' posts

Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel

New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show

SORT BY:
Date
Kudos
   1   2 
Tags:
Difficulty: 505-555 Levelx   Modifiersx                        
Find Similar Topics 
Show Tags
Hide Tags
User avatar
G
PriyamRathor
Manager
Manager
Joined: 17 Aug 2021
Posts: 164
Own Kudos [?]: 92 [0]
Given Kudos: 168
Location: India
WE:Corporate Finance (Accounting)
Send PM
Re: New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show [#permalink] New post   02 Nov 2022, 01:18
wininblue wrote:
New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, it saves seven dollars that would not be spent on having to extinguish big fires.

(A) that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, it saves seven dollars that would not be spent on having to extinguish
(B) that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, seven dollars are saved that would have been spent on extinguishing
(C) that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel saves seven dollars on not having to extinguish
(D) for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, that it saves seven dollars on not having to extinguish
(E) for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management
personnel, that seven dollars are saved that would not have been spent on extinguishing

Official Guide 12 Question

GMAT Official Guide 12

Question: 36
Page: 40
Difficulty: 600

Find All Official Guide Questions

Video Explanations:


Hello Experts ,
KarishmaB AndrewN EducationAisle

In correct answer choice B , what is the meaning conveyed by the use of PRESENT PERFECT TENSE have been spent

According to me , Present Perfect tense is used to show something started in the past and still going on / still having the effect.

In Option B , have been spent depicts that seven dollars were spent in the past and are still being spent.
Is this the meaning conveyed ?

To add to the confusion WOULD has been added. According to me WOULD can be used in 3 ways:-
1. Hypothetical event
2. Used in IF THEN construction
3. To refer to future event from past perspective.

Which way WOULD is used here?

Also, Please help me understand this structure of WOULD + PRESENT PERFECT TENSE and what the structure means ?

Thanks
User avatar
L
KarishmaB
Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 14836
Own Kudos [?]: 64976 [1]
Given Kudos: 428
Location: Pune, India
Send PM
Re: New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show [#permalink] New post   02 Nov 2022, 04:05
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
PriyamRathor wrote:
wininblue wrote:
New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, it saves seven dollars that would not be spent on having to extinguish big fires.

(A) that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, it saves seven dollars that would not be spent on having to extinguish
(B) that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, seven dollars are saved that would have been spent on extinguishing
(C) that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel saves seven dollars on not having to extinguish
(D) for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, that it saves seven dollars on not having to extinguish
(E) for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management
personnel, that seven dollars are saved that would not have been spent on extinguishing

Official Guide 12 Question

GMAT Official Guide 12

Question: 36
Page: 40
Difficulty: 600

Find All Official Guide Questions

Video Explanations:


Hello Experts ,
KarishmaB AndrewN EducationAisle

In correct answer choice B , what is the meaning conveyed by the use of PRESENT PERFECT TENSE have been spent

According to me , Present Perfect tense is used to show something started in the past and still going on / still having the effect.

In Option B , have been spent depicts that seven dollars were spent in the past and are still being spent.
Is this the meaning conveyed ?

To add to the confusion WOULD has been added. According to me WOULD can be used in 3 ways:-
1. Hypothetical event
2. Used in IF THEN construction
3. To refer to future event from past perspective.

Which way WOULD is used here?

Also, Please help me understand this structure of WOULD + PRESENT PERFECT TENSE and what the structure means ?

Thanks


Perfective aspect shows completion. So Present perfect shows completion but recency.

I have done my homework.
My homework has been done.
(An action in a period leading up to the present but the action is complete)

'would' is used in the case of Second & Third Conditionals (hypothetical or unlikely cases)
For example:
If he had told me this earlier, I would have helped him. (future in the past)

Here, in our original sentence, we have a hypothetical situation:
If a dollar had not been spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning etc., then seven dollars would have been spent on extinguishing big fires.

This is how the sentence represents it:
For every dollar spent, we save 7 dollars that would have been spent on extinguishing big fires {if the dollar had not been spent}
User avatar
S
Sneha2021
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
Joined: 20 Dec 2020
Posts: 287
Own Kudos [?]: 30 [0]
Given Kudos: 496
Location: India
Send PM
Re: New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show [#permalink] New post   19 Dec 2022, 09:27
KarishmaB
Hi Karishma,

Can you please explain the sentence structure of E?

New data show(verb) - Main clause
for every dollar...., - prepositional modifier
That seven dollars - DC

Is IC comma DC a valid structure?
(E) for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management
personnel, that seven dollars are saved that would not have been spent on extinguishing

Thank you for your help!
User avatar
L
egmat
e-GMAT Representative
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 4349
Own Kudos [?]: 30812 [0]
Given Kudos: 637
GMAT Date: 08-19-2020
Send PM
Re: New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show [#permalink] New post   19 Dec 2022, 17:57
Expert Reply
Sneha2021 wrote:
KarishmaB
Hi Karishma,

Can you please explain the sentence structure of E?

New data show(verb) - Main clause
for every dollar...., - prepositional modifier
That seven dollars - DC

Is IC comma DC a valid structure?
(E) for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management
personnel, that seven dollars are saved that would not have been spent on extinguishing

Thank you for your help!



Hello Sneha2021,

Although your query is not addressed to me, here are my two cents. :)

You have correctly identified the structure of Choice E. We do have an IC, and then a comma + that + DC. Generally, an Ic and DC can be connected by a comma, but in those cases, the connector "that" is not used. However, when we use the connector "that" to join an IC and a DC, "that" is not preceded by a comma. So, Choice E is erroneous in terms of its structure. Moreover, this choice distorts the logical meaning of the sentence as well.

Hope this helps. :)
Thanks.
Shraddha.
User avatar
L
KarishmaB
Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 14836
Own Kudos [?]: 64976 [0]
Given Kudos: 428
Location: Pune, India
Send PM
Re: New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show [#permalink] New post   19 Dec 2022, 22:24
Expert Reply
Sneha2021 wrote:
KarishmaB
Hi Karishma,

Can you please explain the sentence structure of E?

New data show(verb) - Main clause
for every dollar...., - prepositional modifier
That seven dollars - DC

Is IC comma DC a valid structure?
(E) for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management
personnel, that seven dollars are saved that would not have been spent on extinguishing

Thank you for your help!


When subordinate clause appears after the main clause, we do not use a comma in between.
'Main clause, that clause' is incorrect.

In any case, (E) makes no sense since 'show' needs 'that' after it.
User avatar
G
GMATking94
Manager
Manager
Joined: 16 Jan 2022
Status:Do or Die
Posts: 180
Own Kudos [?]: 68 [0]
Given Kudos: 125
Location: India
Schools: IIMB '25 (A) IIMC '25 (A) IIMA '25 (D) ISB '25 (I)
GMAT 1: 700 Q48 V37
GPA: 4
WE:Operations (Energy and Utilities)
Send PM
Reviews Badge
New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show [#permalink] New post   01 Jul 2023, 22:27
wininblue wrote:
New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, it saves seven dollars that would not be spent on having to extinguish big fires.

(A) that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, it saves seven dollars that would not be spent on having to extinguish

(B) that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, seven dollars are saved that would have been spent on extinguishing

(C) that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel saves seven dollars on not having to extinguish

(D) for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, that it saves seven dollars on not having to extinguish

(E) for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, that seven dollars are saved that would not have been spent on extinguishing


I have a doubt with the questions. Is there an issue in parallel structure?? All options have...

for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel... is "the" after "and" not an issue??

Experts any comments

GMATNinja KarishmaB AjiteshArun MartyTargetTestPrep
User avatar
L
KarishmaB
Tutor
Joined: 16 Oct 2010
Posts: 14836
Own Kudos [?]: 64976 [1]
Given Kudos: 428
Location: Pune, India
Send PM
Re: New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show [#permalink] New post   02 Jul 2023, 00:25
1
Kudos
Expert Reply
GMATking94 wrote:
wininblue wrote:
New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, it saves seven dollars that would not be spent on having to extinguish big fires.

(A) that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, it saves seven dollars that would not be spent on having to extinguish

(B) that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, seven dollars are saved that would have been spent on extinguishing

(C) that for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel saves seven dollars on not having to extinguish

(D) for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, that it saves seven dollars on not having to extinguish

(E) for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel, that seven dollars are saved that would not have been spent on extinguishing


I have a doubt with the questions. Is there an issue in parallel structure?? All options have...

for every dollar spent on controlled small-scale burning, forest thinning, and the training of fire-management personnel... is "the" after "and" not an issue??

Experts any comments

GMATNinja KarishmaB AjiteshArun MartyTargetTestPrep


It is the distinction between a gerund (does not take an article) and a verbal noun (with an article).
You can ignore the difference and yes, they will be considered parallel as long as they are the best option we have.
GMAT Club Bot
gmatclubot
Re: New data from United States Forest Service ecologists show [#permalink]
02 Jul 2023, 00:25
   1   2 
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
6923 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
238 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne
Main navigation
GMAT Resources
Partners
MBA Resources
www.gmac.com|www.mba.com | | GMAT Club Rules | Terms and Conditions